[Elections] Add a "none of the above" option?

Ok if my objection doesn't exist, then the question is what is the impact of
having someone lose in an uncontested election? We have two options vote or
just accept the current candidates since we now have 7. If you run we have
an election!
I like the community involvement but I didn't like seeing Ken lose. I guess
I would vote to put in nota and have a vote.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: elections-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:elections-
>bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Vainsencher
> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:30 PM
> To: elections at lists.squeakfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [Elections] Add a "none of the above" option?
>> This is not how the Condorcet voting method works. Every voter always
> votes for every option, the information he provides is a (possibly
> partial) order of preferences. Therefore A B C N means that I prefer
> anyone over N, and gives no advantage to N at all.
>> For an example, see http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_001 which
> describes Debian's 2004 election, where "none of the above" won over one
> candidate "Gergely". This only occured because 258 voters preferred NOTA
> over Gergely, and 144 prefered Gergely over NOTA. Not an impressive
> victory for NOTA, since Gergely ran as a sort of joke
> (http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_001).
>> I should probably explain this on the mailing list.
>> Daniel
>> Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
> > I'm not sure this works. If like last year we vote for our favorite 7
> > candidates in the order that we want to see them elected and we only
> like 3
> > candidates then we vote for none of the above in place 4. Does this
> really
> > have the effect of voting against people or does none of the above have
> an
> > unfair advantage given that it represents voting against multiple
> > candidates? How do we know which candidate none of above represents a
> vote
> > against? For example if you vote for A B C N and I vote For A B D N, N
> gets
> > two votes! If everyone votes N then it always wins! I wonder if we
> should
> > have a yes or no vote on candidates instead. Like a confirmation.
> >
> > Ron
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: elections-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:elections-
> >> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Vainsencher
> >> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 6:55 AM
> >> To: elections at lists.squeakfoundation.org> >> Subject: [Elections] Add a "none of the above" option?
> >>
> >> Hi everyone, I think that regardless of the number of candidates we
> get,
> >> we should add a "none of the above" option to the vote.
> >>
> >> Cons: Someone might lose to this option and feel rejected.
> >>
> >> Pros: Everyone that beats it will feel more actively endorsed by the
> >> community. A truly terrible candidate cannot be elected by default.
> >> Voters have an explicit way to say they want other candidates.
> >>
> >> What does everyone else think?
> >>
> >> Daniel
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Elections mailing list
> >> Elections at lists.squeakfoundation.org> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections> >>
> >
> >
> >
>> _______________________________________________
> Elections mailing list
>Elections at lists.squeakfoundation.org>http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections